PromoTheRobot Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Levy would be 105 before the Bills managed to put together the right package if players to contend. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 I agree with much of what you say, but do you think that TD is demanding that the Bills predictably blitz on almost every play? Do you think that TD is lining up the DEs 15 yards apart and opening huge running lanes? I have my issues with TD. Big ones, but he is not to blame for ALL of this. 484639[/snapback] Nope...that was not the point...My point was as long as TD had the upper hand over the headcoach/staff, the HC is always going to look over his shoulder about what TD is thinking.... The general manager and the HC should be on equal footing and directly reporting to someone common (like a team president)....With TD being the team president and GM gives him too much power over the HC to influence decisions (as to who should be played, not played etc).... Look at all the successufl teams......they have a strong GM and HC combinations but they do not report to each other..... Belichek and Pioli (even though Belichek has the upperhand over the decisions both report to Kraft). Cowher and Kolbert (Kolbert is in the background, not in the headlines).... Dungy and Polian If at all anything, all the successufl teams have a more dominant coach than their personnel guy, not vice versa...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marv Levy Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Thanks for everyones support of me on TSW. I will come back if Ralph gives me a call. Can't get any worse than what were seeing now. "GO BILLS...." Marv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 I think the reality is that control-freak Donahoe does not want a coach he can't influence; that's why he has brought in neophytes without any head coaching experience. Maybe his problems with Cowher in Pittsburgh have something to do with it. That said, I think Marv would be great back in Buffalo. Perhaps when the Donahoe Era is over... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenchBledsoe Posted October 24, 2005 Author Share Posted October 24, 2005 I think the reality is that control-freak Donahoe does not want a coach he can't influence; that's why he has brought in neophytes without any head coaching experience. Maybe his problems with Cowher in Pittsburgh have something to do with it.That said, I think Marv would be great back in Buffalo. Perhaps when the Donahoe Era is over... 484885[/snapback] Which should be this coming offseason. . . which will begin as soon as our week 17 game is completed! Ralphie has probably got to consider pulling the plug on TD. I mean, how many years has he been here now? 5? To still be going backwards at this point is an obvious red flag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCBongo Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Call me nuts but I like Mularkey. I do not like the way this team has played thus far and I think TD is proving to have lost his touch in evaluating talent. But Mularkey could turn out to be a solid NFL coach - unless he takes the Mike Tice road. Marv was awesome and is where is belong, on the Wall and in Canton. I think his football fire has burned out, but he might be a good person to have in the war room on draft day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jester43 Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 you're not nuts. i don't think mularkey's the problem. i've never been a fan or gray, but i really think this team is just talent-poor. and for that i blame donohoe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenchBledsoe Posted October 24, 2005 Author Share Posted October 24, 2005 Call me nuts but I like Mularkey. I do not like the way this team has played thus far and I think TD is proving to have lost his touch in evaluating talent. But Mularkey could turn out to be a solid NFL coach - unless he takes the Mike Tice road.Marv was awesome and is where is belong, on the Wall and in Canton. I think his football fire has burned out, but he might be a good person to have in the war room on draft day. 485457[/snapback] Yes, or at least an advisor, ala Bill Walsh a while back. I've read that Ralphie still has a good relationship with Marv and is in contact semi-frequently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greybeard Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 It apparently doesn't matter that the game has changed and these coaches are old now. Great coaches just add something intangible to a team. This is a fact. It may take a year or so, but the team will buy into what the great coaches "are selling". Look at Gibbs and the Skins. They are going to be a force later this year, and even more so next year. I'd take Marv back in an instant. He wants the job too. I never thought he should have left in the first place. I think he should coach until the day he passes or cannot physically do it. . . We'll just call him the "Bear Bryant" of the NFL. 484289[/snapback] I always say you can't take away what a guy has accomplished but in Marv's case I would also say, he had the most talented team in the NFL in two of the 4 super bowl years and couldn't win a SB. And as far as Marv picking coaches, he did pick Walt Corey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jester43 Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 no, marv's not the answer. am i the only one who remembers how relieved everyone was when he finally resigned??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsWatch Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 So all I'm saying is, why would TD, after admitting hiring GW was a mistake (I think his firing is admission enough) hire another rookie HC? Doesn't that risk making the same mistake twice? Mularkey's 0-4 start may have proven that there is a learning curve for coaches in the NFL as well as players.484577[/snapback] Gregg Williams was NOT fired. He was offered a one year extension during season and turned it down while rest accepted it and at end of contract he was not re-signed; which is why at end of year he had to ASK for some coaches he wanted. Repeat again GW was not fired. It is NOT the same thing as not being re-hired. There are learning curves for players, GMs, coaches and even posters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRH Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 I think the reality is that control-freak Donahoe does not want a coach he can't influence; that's why he has brought in neophytes without any head coaching experience. Maybe his problems with Cowher in Pittsburgh have something to do with it. 484885[/snapback] When TD hired Cowher, he was a neophyte without any head coaching experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 When TD hired Cowher, he was a neophyte without any head coaching experience. 485550[/snapback] Very true... but they eventually butted heads and the town wasn't big enough for the both of them. I really think Donahoe is hell-bent on making sure that never happens again. He won't ever hire a head coach with any semblance of a backbone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenchBledsoe Posted October 25, 2005 Author Share Posted October 25, 2005 Very true... but they eventually butted heads and the town wasn't big enough for the both of them. I really think Donahoe is hell-bent on making sure that never happens again. He won't ever hire a head coach with any semblance of a backbone. 485554[/snapback] Absolutely true. . . and that's why we'll never have a top-notch coach as long as TD is around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts